Gujarat High Court
Khushbuben Bhagavatprasad Dave vs State Of Gujarat on 1 August, 2025
Author: Nikhil S. Kariel
Bench: Nikhil S. Kariel
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/122/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/08/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 122 of 2025
==========================================================
KHUSHBUBEN BHAGAVATPRASAD DAVE & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR PA JADEJA(3726) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2,3
MR MITUL GAUTAM, ASST. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the
Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4
MR HS MUNSHAW(495) for the Respondent(s) No. 5
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL
Date : 01/08/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned advocate Ms.Shivani Barot for learned
advocate Mr.P.A.Jadeja for the petitioners, learned advocate
Mr.H.S.Munshaw with learned advocate Mr.Devang Bhatt
appearing on behalf of the respondent no.5 and learned
Assistant Government Pleader Mr.Mitul Gautam appearing on
behalf of the respondent - State.
2. While the petition has been preferred praying for the
benefit of regularization, learned advocate Ms.Barot would
submit that the issue in question is squarely covered by the
decision of the learned Coordinate Bench dated 01.07.2016 in
Special Civil Application No.13621/2014 and allied
matters.
3. Considering the decision passed by the learned
Coordinate Bench, it would appear that while the request for
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/122/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/08/2025
undefined
grant of regularization to similarly situated employees had not
been considered, whereas, the learned Coordinate Bench had
directed that the petitioners shall be allowed to continue on
their contractual appointment and would not be replaced by
other set of contractual employees and they shall be
continued till the scheme continues subject to evaluation of
their performance and subject to Discipline and Appeal Rules
as may be applicable etc.
3.1. Since learned advocate Mr.Munshaw does not contest
the issue with regard to petitioners being similarly situated to
the petitioners of the said group of petitions, the directions
issued by the learned Coordinate Bench at paragraph no.52
should also enure in favour of the present petitioners.
3.2. The directions issued by the learned Coordinate Bench
from para 52.1 through 52.7 are reproduced hereinbelow for
benefit:-
"52.1 The prayer of the petitioners to regularize their
contractual services and make them permanent on
the establishment is rejected. Limited immunity that
is made available to the petitioners is by allowing
them to continue on their contractual employment
and not to be replaced by other set of contractual
employees on ad-hocism. The petitioners shall be
continued in the existing cadre as long as the said
Scheme continues, but purely on contractual basis
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/122/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/08/2025
undefined
and such employment shall be coterminus with the
scheme, subject to evaluation of their performance,
service and disciplinary rules as may be made
applicable to them. The respondent-State shall insist
on periodical upgradation of knowledge,
improvisation of technical skill and overall
preparedness on the subject, so also on
computerisation.
52.2 The challenge to the Government Resolutions
dated December 23, 2013 and August 28, 2014 and
the consequential process of recruitment undertaken
in the year 2014 pursuant to the public advertisement
dated August 28, 2014, succeeds qua the petitioners
only. Those petitioner who have qualified in the last
examination of the year 2014 shall be continued on
contractual employment without insistence on their
fresh appointment by the respondent-State.
The respondent-authorities shall renew the
petitioners' contract of service on the same terms and
conditions as continued so far.
52.3 Those petitioners who have cleared the
examination and not qualified in the process of
recruitment of the year 2014, shall not be
discontinued, if already on contractual service
pursuant to their selection through legally
permissible mode in the years 2009 and 2011.
52.4 Those of the petitioners who have approached
this Court after their termination on account of non-
extension of their contractual employment, but
otherwise given appointment after selection under
the Rules/ on following public advertisement, shall be
restored to continue on their original posts. This shall
be considered as their contractual employment
without any break.
52.5 It is being clarified that those appointments
which have been made freshly pursuant to the
aforementioned resolutions and process of selection
under challenge in the year 2014, in no manner, shall
be affected by this judgment.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/122/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/08/2025
undefined
52.6 It is being clarified that in absence of any policy
of the State to grant permanency in any of the cadres
at the District, Taluka or Gram Panchayat levels, the
issue of the length of service of the petitioners
deserves no adjudication. However, if any such policy
in future is made by the State, the petitioners shall be
at liberty to raise the contention of continuation and
shall be entitled to raise the issue of the length of
service from the date of their initial appointment.
This Court has not concluded the said issue in the
present group of petitions and has left the same for
the petitioners to contend at an appropriate time in
the future, if the occasion so arises.
52.7 As a parting note, it is being observed that this
Court would fail in its duty if it does not act as a
catalyst in the words of the Apex Court and draws the
attention of the State Government that if may need to
take a policy decision in respect of creating
permanent establishment where contractual
appointments have continued for more than a decade
and its continuation is still felt by gearing up at all
levels. Since it entails large financial implication, a
marathon exercise is begging the attention of the
State."
3.4. As observed hereinabove, the said directions would hold
good in favour of the present petitioners also.
4. With these directions, the present petition stands
disposed of as allowed.
(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J)
Bhoomi
